In the case of Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company v. Toops, Administratrix (1929), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mrs. Toops who was seeking compensation for her husband's death due to negligence by his employer, Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company. Mr. Toops had been killed while working on a railway line in New Mexico but was employed out of Kansas where he also resided with his wife and children at the time of his death. The court held that under federal law - specifically the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) - an employee or their family could sue for damages in any state where the company did business regardless of where employment contracts were made or injuries occurred; thus making it possible for Mrs.Toops to file suit within Missouri rather than being forced to do so within Kansas as argued by AT&SFRC.

In the dissenting opinion for Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company v. Toops, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring out-of-state corporations to appoint an in-state agent for service of process violated principles of federalism and due process. The dissent contended that this requirement placed an undue burden on interstate commerce by forcing companies to maintain a physical presence in every state where they do business. It also raised concerns about potential abuses of power by states seeking to exert control over foreign corporations. Furthermore, it questioned whether such laws truly served their stated purpose of protecting local citizens from unscrupulous businesses or were instead protectionist measures designed to favor domestic companies at the expense of their out-of-state competitors.